I watched it twice and I loved it. But I read the book about 25 years ago and have wanted to see a live-action movie made of it ever since. I actually don't mind that the story is being stretched out to fill 3 movies, even though they could have easily told the entire story in one movie.

I also watched it in a regular theater and didn't get to see the 3D, 48 fps version. However, I've not heard too many good things about that. Mostly just about the framerate feeling too unnatural (even though the human eye sees at the equivalent of 60 fps). My theory is that people are just so accustomed to the 24 fps of movies and the 29.97 fps of video that they just aren't used to the higher, more realistic framerate.

Peter Jackson is the only person who could do it justice, IMO. Where I disagree with you, Nate, is that there is far too much in the story to cram it into one movie. I was really happy to see the powers-that-be are giving The Hobbit its due and releasing it in 3 parts.

Where I disagree with you, Nate, is that there is far too much in the story to cram it into one movie. :

Well, I agree that it would be a hackjob, but it could still technically be done since the primary gist of the story is Bilbo helping the Dwarfs reclaim a lost treasure that was stolen by a dragon (while discovering a secret ring along the way). They could tell that story in 3 hours, but they would have to leave out a lot of extra stuff from the books.

I really do love the fact that the book is being expanded into 3 films, though. It's my favorite book in the whole Middle Earth saga, so I think it's awesome that the success of the LOTR films paved the way for such a comprehensive film version of The Hobbit.